Papers › EviDR: Evidence-Emphasized Discrete Reasoning for Reasoning Machine Reading Comprehension
EviDR: Evidence-Emphasized Discrete Reasoning for Reasoning Machine Reading Comprehension
Yongwei Zhou, Junwei Bao, Haipeng Sun, Jiahui Liang, Youzheng Wu, Xiaodong He, BoWen Zhou, Tiejun Zhao
Reasoning machine reading comprehension (R-MRC) aims to answer complex questions that require discrete reasoning based on text. To support discrete reasoning, evidence, typically the concise textual fragments that describe question-related facts, including topic entities and attribute values, are crucial clues from question to answer. However, previous end-to-end methods that achieve state-of-the-art performance rarely solve the problem by paying enough emphasis on the modeling of evidence, missing the opportunity to further improve the model's reasoning ability for R-MRC. To alleviate the above issue, in this paper, we propose an evidence-emphasized discrete reasoning approach (EviDR), in which sentence and clause level evidence is first detected based on distant supervision, and then used to drive a reasoning module implemented with a relational heterogeneous graph convolutional network to derive answers. Extensive experiments are conducted on DROP (discrete reasoning over paragraphs) dataset, and the results demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed approach. In addition, qualitative analysis verifies the capability of the proposed evidence-emphasized discrete reasoning for R-MRC.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections